babble
Monday, May 24, 2004
I'd cut off both your wings on principle alone:
The fact that Congress has a bill up for consideration to reinstate the draft has been whipping its way around lots of blogs in the past few days. These bills aren't just for a regular draft, however; they are for mandatory military service for everyone age 18-26. These bills, HR 163 and S 89, referred to as the Universal National Service Act, do the following:
Declares that it is the obligation of every U.S. citizen, and every other person residing in the United States, between the ages of 18 and 26 to perform a two-year period of national service, unless exempted, either as a member of an active or reserve component of the armed forces or in a civilian capacity that promotes national defense. Requires induction into national service by the President. Sets forth provisions governing: (1) induction deferments, postponements, and exemptions, including exemption of a conscientious objector from military service that includes combatant training; and (2) discharge following national service.
Amends the Military Selective Service Act to authorize the military registration of females.
Everyone is all up in arms about this, and they should be - this is required, mandatory military service, not a random draft lottery. You turn 18, you join the military. There are provisions for conscientious objectors, but they are very vague and don't exempt you from service - you'd still have to serve, just in a non-combatant capacity. In addition, Canada has signed an agreement with the United States that would make it much harder for draft dodgers to go there.
While I am completely against this bill and this war, I theoretically understand the need for a draft - if your country's armed forces are all there because they choose that as their career, they are going to make decisions based on their careers, not on what's actually right or moral in the situation that they're in. Career military people are less likely question their commanders when they're being ordered to electrocute prisoners' genitalia. However, mandatory military service is another thing entirely. I am hoping that even pro-war people see this and realize that yes, their sons and daughters and perhaps even they would have to serve and potentially die for this war. Maybe it'll change their minds. I'm not holding my breath, though.
By the way, this bill has been on the table in both the House and Senate since January 2003. 2003, people. Almost a year and a half. Where's the major media coverage?
babbled by Kat @ 11:02:00 AM |
|
